On 10/26/2010 10:01 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> Not unless they are actively known to break. People get huffy about it > > Well they do -- i just found out. Sounds like a good reason to put in a warning or error. >> because even if it is known to have problems it doesn't break *their* >> particular configuration. I'm getting to be of the opinion that people >> who compile modern kernels with ancient compilers and expect it to work >> are suffering from some particular kind of insanity -- it's nothing the >> distros do. The only exception are embedded people who compile with the >> latest 3.4 gcc; they have explained they do so because newer gccs have >> too many dependencies (the actual compiler, not the generated code) and >> for speed. > > At least in the old days the main reason for gcc 3 was build speed. > AKPM and some others used to be fond of that. > > 3.x is apparently much faster than 4.x That is an issue too, as 3.x does a lot fewer optimizations than 4.x. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
